Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Michael, Colorado is one destroyed and worse than California.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
While California has a twenty five cent bag fee, they
at least still have a choice of plastic bags at
the checkout counter.
Speaker 3 (00:15):
Hmmm, Paulus really did a number on us.
Speaker 4 (00:17):
And he's a damn moron.
Speaker 3 (00:22):
As long as we're.
Speaker 2 (00:23):
Talking about guns, A palette judge on the Ninth Circuit,
which is probably the most liberal circuit, is hearing a
gun case, and one of the judges, Lawrence van Dyke,
delivers a descent and in the course of the descent
(00:44):
he and this is all being recorded, and then he
goes through's chambers later and he does another recording. But
what's fascinating about what he does is that he shared
a video of himself. Actually this ascend different firearms. Now
in his chambers he has and I don't know whether
(01:06):
it's a replica or an actual, or maybe it's been disabled,
but he has an AR fifteen on the wall behind
his bench.
Speaker 3 (01:18):
I'd say, I like this guy. I like him.
Speaker 2 (01:24):
You find a defensive sucks to be you, doesn't it.
It's his courtroom. It's an eighteen minute video and he's
talking about essentially the same thing that Colorado's trying to do,
and that is to ban the manufacturer, sale, distribution, possession, whatever,
of semi automatic weapons that have the ability to hold
(01:48):
a magazine with a capacity greater than ten rounds, which
is in common use, common use. And the other thing
is Bill three does, just in generic terms, is it
makes it timely and costly prohibitive to get the training
(02:10):
that this bill requires in order to go to a
sheriff who does not have any longer a shell issue rule.
In other words, if I go to the Douglas County
sheriff and I've taken you know, whatever, you know, stupid
training I have to to do currently to get my
(02:31):
concealed carry permit, think about this. This is to exercise.
This is to exercise not only a god given right
of self defense, but it's to exercise a constitutionally protected
right to keep in bear arms. You have to get
a license to do that, and you forget training to
do that. Well, I think we apply the same damn
(02:53):
rule to speech that if you want to exercise your
right to speech, then I think you ought to take
all these you know, nineteen eighty four type speech classes
to teach you what's offensive and not offensive. I mean,
it's what they're doing. In Great Britain, you can get arrest,
you can get jailed for just being offensive, and there's
(03:14):
no standard by what's offensive. So the other point that
I would make about Senate Bill three is this, they're
disenfranchising poor people. So if you live in one of
these crime ridden apartments that is occupied by Trenda Arragua,
(03:40):
or you live in a neighborhood where crime is rampant
and it's a poor neighborhood, you probably cannot afford the
training that's going to be required so that you could
go to a gun store which may soon be out
of business because they can't sell the guns, and you know,
everybody's just going to go to I'm do you think
(04:01):
I will? Now, I'm not going to say that, because
I'd still like to have a firearms dealer, a gun
store for a sponsor of this program. But I was
going to say absent that I'll just never buy a
gun in Colorado again, just never again. And I hate
(04:22):
to say that because that's going to harm all of
the gun stores in Colorado. But if this bill passes,
and a bill is ultimately upheld, if there's not an
injunction against the enforcement of this bill, or if police
doesn't veto this bill. Why would you ever buy ammo
(04:43):
or a gun or anything in the state. Again, I
certainly wouldn't. I'll just go to New Mexico. In fact,
I'll just go to a.
Speaker 3 (04:52):
Guy that.
Speaker 2 (04:55):
Deals and guns that doesn't live far from men disclose location,
and I'll just tell you what they want.
Speaker 3 (04:59):
I'll just I'll just buy it from him.
Speaker 5 (05:01):
I just get one out of a trunk on Federal I'll.
Speaker 2 (05:03):
Just go exactly, I'll just go to Federal Boulevard. Or
I'll just you know, I don't really want to get
that close to trend to Arragua, but I'll just go
to trend to a Rogua and I'll get it there.
Speaking of trend of Aragua. Before I get back, hang on,
I'll get back to the judge in California in the
Ninth Circuit in just a minute. But remember when we
were told to trend to Arragua, that violent Venezuelan gang
(05:23):
here in Denver and Aurora was just a figment of
our imagination. Remember that Dragging is doing everything he can
today to try to make me laugh because he knows
what'd you call me earlier. Feisty, feisty, am, I feisty
this morning. I'm kind of riled up a little bit today.
Speaker 5 (05:45):
Are I almost old man yelling at clouds? But deserve
so well?
Speaker 3 (05:51):
Thank you, well, thank you for at least admitting deservedly so.
Speaker 4 (05:55):
Well.
Speaker 3 (05:55):
You may remember we were told.
Speaker 2 (05:57):
That TD it was just a figment of our imagination. Well,
guess what happened yesterday the head of the Drug Enforcement Administration,
the DEA, Well, they burst your bubble. They burst that
bubble of that of that imagination, and of course also
of the Democrats of Governor Polis, Mayor Johnston, Mayor Kaufman,
and all the other yahoos that kept telling us that
(06:17):
trend rog with. No, there's nothing to see here, move along,
there's nothing to find, nothing to worry about.
Speaker 3 (06:23):
The DEA confirmed.
Speaker 2 (06:25):
Yesterday that it regards once again Colorado made the top
of the list. Dragon loves list. I love I love
it when I can tell Dragon that we made the
top of the list.
Speaker 3 (06:37):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (06:38):
The head of the DAD e A confirmed Monday that
Colorado is quote ground zero for quote some of the
most violent criminals in America and the quote command center
of TDA.
Speaker 3 (06:56):
But it's just a figment of your imagination.
Speaker 2 (06:59):
Now, in the story that I read, the Denver Police
Department seems to remain in that imaginary bubble, claiming that
they have no evidence that that's true. And I'm thinking,
you know what, They're probably right, because I really doubt
that the Denver Police Department is actually looking for trend
(07:20):
Ragua Hells Belza, not looking for illegal aliens. Why would
they be looking for Venezuelan gang members that probably have
better firearms than they do. And oh, by the way,
when Senate Bill three eventually makes the Governor's desk and
the dumbass governor signs it, God, Jared, I cannot believe.
I cannot believe that that you, as a congressman, and
(07:47):
you and I got to know each other fairly well,
we've had dinner together before. You seem like a reasonable person.
You have turned into a complete socialist. Might You've gotten
off the deep end, totally off the deep end, all
in pursuit of your goal of placating the Marxist wing
of your party and because you want to be president. Well,
(08:11):
how did that worked out for Kamala Harris? How did
that work out for Joe Biden? How's that worked out
for almost any Marxist running for office right now. Oh,
I know Bernie and AOC are drawing big crowds, but
those are paid crowds that are like a bunch of
groupies just following them around. I don't see that you've
got any groupies. You're not a leader. You're not a
(08:32):
leader at all. You're a follower. You are truly just
a follower. Oh, don't get me off. Jared polls for
a moment. Well, anyway, so the judge posts an eighteen minute.
Speaker 3 (08:47):
Video and you can also see it.
Speaker 5 (08:50):
Michael says, go here, do yes.
Speaker 2 (08:52):
And you're gonna hear part of it too, that large
capacity magazines are covered under the Second Amendment. He argues
that the magazines can allow a gun to actually function
better and should be considered functional parts, not an accessory.
And he planned a voice his argument in his descent,
but found it obviously much more effective to simply show you.
(09:17):
And he literally shows you what he's talking about. This
is fascinating to me.
Speaker 3 (09:29):
Here we go.
Speaker 6 (09:30):
Hi, I'm Judge Van Dyk, and welcome to my chambers.
Speaker 7 (09:33):
I'm making his video as part of my opinion in
the Dunca Vonte case. In this case, the state of
California made the argument, which the majority is now accepted, that.
Speaker 6 (09:41):
A magazine holding more than ten rounds is just an.
Speaker 7 (09:43):
Accessory, not an arm protected by the second must right
of the people to keep him their arms. I think
anyone with a basic familiarity with firearms could show you
that this attemptive distinction is simply inconsistent with reality. I
alluded to this during oral argument when I asked California's
counsel about the balance of the tests that are proposed
for what as.
Speaker 6 (10:00):
An arm protected by the Second Amendment. Let's go to
that exchange, now, magazine, and I can ask your.
Speaker 1 (10:06):
Question about that, because so the way you're treating magazines,
it seems like you could use the same sort of
rationale as between a non sim automatic firearm salelever action
or both action or revolver type action and a sem
automatic arm. So I'm trying to figure out if you're
if you're saying, well, what we do is we say,
have people ever.
Speaker 6 (10:26):
Banned particularly dangerous rounds?
Speaker 1 (10:29):
And now we're saying large capacity magazines are particularly dangerous?
Why couldn't that same reasoning be used to ban semi
automatic firearms altogether?
Speaker 3 (10:39):
To say, because I mean, you know, in Colorado.
Speaker 6 (10:41):
Think about it, like during.
Speaker 1 (10:43):
The Revolutionary War, if the United States had had semi
automatic firearms that only held five to ten rounds, it
had been about ten minutes and it would have been
over right as against muskets. So clearly, the semi automatic
mechanism is way, way, way, way way more particularly dangerous
than the difference to delta between a ten round magazine
and a fifteen round magazine. So why does your reasoning
(11:06):
not mean that if you're if this reasoning works, why
does your reasoning not mean that a state could just
ban the semi automatic firearms altogether.
Speaker 6 (11:14):
So if we're just.
Speaker 8 (11:14):
Start talking earner about this initial sort of textual question,
I think, if you're dealing with a semi automatic, that
would fit the definition of an arm.
Speaker 1 (11:24):
No, but that semi automatic could be a revolver, like
it could be I mean, just like just like this,
that high capacity magazine could be a lower capacity magazine, right, because.
Speaker 3 (11:34):
What does it do? It delivers the round to the chamber.
Speaker 2 (11:39):
A revolver, you pull the trigger, the cylinder moves, delivers
the round to the chamber so it can be fired.
What so, and that's essential that's essential to a revolver.
So his point is a magazine does exactly the same thing.
The magazine, say, delivers the realm to the chamber. It's
(12:03):
an essential part of the firearm. It's not an accessory, right.
Speaker 5 (12:06):
You're honor.
Speaker 8 (12:07):
So I think that that would fit the definition of arm,
and then you'd move on to the other aspects of
the brewin analysis. At stage one is a particular weapon
that's being addressed by the law in the tradition of
dangerous and unusual? Is it in common use for self defense?
And we think Heller is clear that that has to
consider the characters.
Speaker 1 (12:25):
I'm not understanding your I guess I think I'm missing
your response to my It seems to me that just
as you could say, are you saying that that yes,
so it would be an arm under you're not. You're
not conceding that it would be an arm under stage one,
So why are you saying it wouldn't.
Speaker 6 (12:39):
Be an arm?
Speaker 1 (12:40):
But the same automatic versus revolver, say, distinction is something
that that we're stuck with. I mean, you would agree
that you can't ban the automatic the automatic mechanism, well.
Speaker 8 (12:52):
An automatic mechanism, I think that you can ban I
think the Supreme Court as.
Speaker 1 (12:55):
Recond the automatic mechanism is a term that sem autos
and fol autos use, an automatic mechanism.
Speaker 6 (13:00):
Sure, you're unner. I'm sorry for the confusion.
Speaker 8 (13:01):
No, I don't think that we could ban all semi
automatic weapons. I think Heller makes that clear. The point
I was just making is with respect to accessories. I
think we have a difference of opinion where my friends
suggest any accessory that is somehow helpful storm.
Speaker 1 (13:16):
So that's that's important because you're so your your argument
turns on whether you can characterize accessory. So you would
say that the revolver versus some automatic is not an accessory,
but that but that a.
Speaker 6 (13:27):
Magazine is a successory.
Speaker 1 (13:28):
So what would you think about like a red dot site,
you know, electro optics, which are which many many firearms
are going to electronic optics nowadays. Could you they're obviously
an accessory because you could have iron sights.
Speaker 6 (13:40):
Could you ban those?
Speaker 8 (13:41):
Well, so your onner, I'm not intimately familiar with that.
Speaker 2 (13:46):
I'm not intimately familiar with a red dot optic. I'm
not familiar with electronic optics. And you're sitting here arguing
the second Amendment case, are you even familiar with guns? Huh?
Speaker 8 (13:58):
And I do want to answer this question and make
sure that I save time for rebuttal, I think that
the question at the outset would be is that if
it's an accessory, is it within the to share a
principle that it's necessary to the realization of the right
to self defense? And you'd have to build a record
and analyze it in that case, counsel.
Speaker 6 (14:18):
Now, from this exchange, it became clear to me than many, including.
Speaker 7 (14:20):
Both California's Council and my colleagues in the majority in
this case, lack of basic familiarity with firearms. I understand
the inherent shortcomings and obvious in administrability of the test
that California was proposing and which the majority in this
case is now adopted. I originally explan to explain all
this in writing in my opinion and why the argument
doesn't make sense, But it occurred to me that in
(14:40):
this instance, showing is much more effective than telling, as
you all saying, go so picture is sometimes worth a
thousand words, and here I hope you will agree that
the videos at least worked that much. And I suppose
at this point in the video is as good a
time as any to apologize for.
Speaker 6 (14:54):
Any shortcomings of the video.
Speaker 7 (14:55):
This is the first video like this that I've ever made,
and in our digital age, I fear that people have
become accustomed to a production quality that I'm sure that
I fall.
Speaker 6 (15:03):
Far short of.
Speaker 7 (15:04):
But I hope and expect that, regardless of any such flaws,
this video will so powerfully serve the purpose for which
I've made it. I also want to emphasize that for
safety purposes, I have rendered an operable all the guns.
Speaker 6 (15:14):
And gun parts that I use to demonstrate today. And finally,
as an appellate body, is obviously.
Speaker 7 (15:19):
Not our role to make factual determination, so I share
this not to supplement the factual record that we are using.
Speaker 6 (15:24):
To decide this case.
Speaker 7 (15:25):
Instead, I share this because a rudimentary understanding of how
guns are made, sold, use, and commonly modified makes obvious
why Californias for post tests and the one my colleagues
are adopting today simply does not work.
Speaker 6 (15:36):
I'm sure I could explain all of this.
Speaker 7 (15:37):
In writing without being accused of improper fact finding, but
it's obviously much more effective to simply show you.
Speaker 6 (15:43):
So let's do that now.
Speaker 2 (15:45):
I love this. I love that this judge is doing
this now. I don't know how widely this will be distributed.
Speaker 3 (15:54):
I don't know how.
Speaker 2 (15:55):
Many people will see it, but the fact that he's said, look,
I'm not supplementing the record. I could put all this
in writing. In fact, I'm sure in his descent he
has it all in writing. But he's going to supplement
his written descent with this video to simply show interested parties,
including the dumb ass person representing the state of California,
(16:19):
about how a magazine is not an accessory. It's an
integral part of the firearm. If you have think about
it in negative terms. If you have a semi automatic firearm,
you've got a nine millimeter glock, but you can't insert
(16:43):
a magazine.
Speaker 3 (16:45):
To you, what good is the block.
Speaker 2 (16:50):
He's trying to point out that it's an integral part
of the firearm, and by making it an accessory, you're
in essence, any these semi automatic firearms that are in
common use, which is the test of whether or not
you have a right to keep them, bear that r'
(17:11):
you'll here's explanation next.
Speaker 6 (17:13):
Correct me if I'm wrong.
Speaker 4 (17:14):
But firearms that use a magazine are inoperable the speed
magazine is removed. You can't just take a round and
shove it up in there with your finger.
Speaker 3 (17:26):
It doesn't work.
Speaker 4 (17:27):
It's meant to be used with that magazine.
Speaker 5 (17:32):
You can put one in the chamber right, it will
still fire. When I wouldn't try it, you would have
to load each round individually into the chamber every time
there there.
Speaker 2 (17:48):
You would have to do that. But you can't. There's
there's physically I'm trying to play it through. I had
I that's pretty dangerous. You can't.
Speaker 3 (18:06):
I don't think there's a way to do it. He
talks about that.
Speaker 7 (18:10):
Okay, to demonstrate, I'm going to start with this sig
P three twenty that's basically in his stock configuration. That is,
this gun is basically in the same configuration it would
come to you from the manufacturer and results you at a retailer.
This is one of the one of the most popular
handguns currently on the market in the United States, and
(18:30):
so I'm going to use this to point out some
of the essential parts of a handgun.
Speaker 6 (18:33):
These same parts would exist on pretty much every handgun, at.
Speaker 7 (18:37):
Least of This is a semi automatic type. So let
me start by pointing out a few of them. This
one comes with a standard twenty one round magazine. Comes
from factories like that. You can buy a similar version
that comes with the with a seventeen round magazine that
fits flush and so it comes to twenty one or
seventeen round magazine. It has a standard full sized group.
(18:59):
It has a factory trigger which has a pull weight
of about seven pounds or so, has front and rear
iron sights that are used to aim the firearm. It
has this little takedown lever which is small and you
may have trouble seeing it, but we're going to talk
about that someone later. And that's what you use to
remove the slide and disassemble the firearm. And the entire
gun is designed around the automatic cycling mechanism. That is,
(19:22):
when you pull the trigger and fire around right when
that app is, it automatically will wrap the slide back,
eject the round to spent cartridge out of the gun.
Speaker 6 (19:32):
It will grab a new round out of the magazine,
put that round.
Speaker 7 (19:35):
Into the chamber, into the barrel, and it'll be ready
to fire another round the.
Speaker 6 (19:40):
Next time you pull the trigger.
Speaker 7 (19:41):
So this is a semi automatic firearm. Now I want
to use this handgun to illustrate first California and the
Majority's argument as applied to this obviously typical and very
common handgun. And then I want to show you that
the same argument would apply to other parts.
Speaker 6 (19:57):
Of the firearm and to this firearm as a whole.
Speaker 7 (20:00):
Now, as a reminder, California's argument, which the majority's adopted
here said, a magazine that holds more than ten rounds
is not an arm protected by the Second Amendment. So
this twenty one round magazine that comes from the factory,
or a seventeen round magazine is.
Speaker 6 (20:14):
Not an arm protected by the Second Amendment.
Speaker 7 (20:16):
Now, California acknowledges that a magazine is necessary to make
the firearm.
Speaker 2 (20:21):
Function, but they see the magazine is necessary to make
the firearm function. To the talkbacks point, Without the magazine,
the firearm doesn't function.
Speaker 6 (20:35):
I argue that.
Speaker 7 (20:36):
Because you can replace the standard magazine with one that
holds fewer rounds ten rounds or less than, these higher
capacity magazines are not an arm and thus wholly unprotected.
Speaker 6 (20:46):
Five.
Speaker 2 (20:46):
Now, think about the brilliance of that argument. So the
state of California wants to argue that if it holds
more than ten rounds. So it's seventeen or twenty one rounds,
then that is an accessory. But if it holds ten
rounds or less, that's not an accessory, and it's an
integral part of the firearm. It's the same magazine, it
(21:10):
just holds a different.
Speaker 3 (21:12):
Number of realms.
Speaker 2 (21:14):
But you can't the firearms inoperable without the five, the ten,
the seventeen, or the twenty one round magazine. And he's
demonstrating this. He's actually showing you how it works.
Speaker 6 (21:28):
Either Second Amend.
Speaker 7 (21:30):
Now, the problem with California's argument is that, as I
pointed out, an oral argument, the exact same argument would
apply to essentially every part on this firearm, which would
mean that essentially nothing on this.
Speaker 6 (21:40):
Firearm would be protected by the Second Amendment.
Speaker 7 (21:42):
Allow me to illustrate that using this firearm not oral argument,
I ask California's council if their argument meant that the
sights on this firearm are.
Speaker 6 (21:51):
Not protected by the Second Amendment.
Speaker 7 (21:52):
And part of the reason I'm making his video is
because it didn't appear that council understood what I was asking.
So take a look again at this handgun. What you
see on here are iron sites. You have a front
and a rear iron sight. And the way that you
fire this handgun, the way you aim it is you
take and you line up these two sites and you
line them up on what you want to shoot at,
and that's how you hit what you're aiming at with
(22:13):
this firearm. These are iron sites, for they're the probably
the most common.
Speaker 6 (22:18):
Sighting system for a handgun.
Speaker 7 (22:20):
And but all you have to do on this particular
handgun to change out the sites is remove two screws
in this slide right here, and the back site comes off.
And when you do that, you can put the two
screws back into a red dot optic and now you
will have a firearm instead of iron sights.
Speaker 6 (22:37):
Will have a red dot optic. Let me illustrate that
by just taking a slide where I've already installed the
red dot optic and here you go.
Speaker 7 (22:44):
See so now you have this backs back iron sight's
been taken off, and here's a red dot optic now.
Speaker 2 (22:50):
And hand So all he's done here is these taken
the rear iron site out, put a red dot optic
on the rear, and put the slide back on. Reassemble
the gun.
Speaker 7 (23:04):
Then that's an experience shooter this red dot optic allows
you to shoot the firearm more quickly, to get on target,
on quickly.
Speaker 6 (23:11):
More quickly, to hit what you're aiming at, be more accurate.
Speaker 7 (23:16):
And so it's obviously much more dangerous if it's being
used for an unlawful or wrong purpose, but if it's
being used for a lawful purpose, and then it makes
the firearm better for that intended purpose. So this firearm
would be better for self defense or competition, recreational shooting or.
Speaker 3 (23:35):
Hunting, and law enforcement.
Speaker 6 (23:39):
My own self.
Speaker 7 (23:41):
Defense hand gun, which this is another P three twenty
that's been configured slightly differently, has a red dot optic
precisely because it makes the firearm better for its intended purpose,
that is self defense.
Speaker 6 (23:53):
It makes it more accurate, more quickly, and shoot more quickly.
Speaker 7 (23:56):
Now, so in that sense, this red dot optic is
just like this magazine. It makes the firearm more dangerous
when it's misused, but it also makes the firearm work
better for its intended purpose when.
Speaker 6 (24:10):
It's used properly.
Speaker 7 (24:12):
Well, you may think that's pretty intuitive about the sighting
system for a firearm, but the same thing is true
about basically every part of this gun.
Speaker 6 (24:19):
Let's take a look at a part which maybe a
little less.
Speaker 7 (24:22):
Intuitive, which is that takedown lever that I talked about earlier.
This little piece here is necessary for the operation of
the firearm.
Speaker 6 (24:30):
It's a tiny little piece that you need to have
for the firearm.
Speaker 7 (24:34):
And so you would think, well, since it's necessary, then
it must be an arm protected by the Second Amendment,
but not under California's logic in this case.
Speaker 6 (24:41):
See, you can replace this.
Speaker 7 (24:43):
Factory takedown lever with a different factory takedown lever.
Speaker 6 (24:46):
This one's called a gas pedal. And when you do that,
you replace it, you put the slide back on. Now
the firearm is a lot more controllable under recoil.
Speaker 7 (24:57):
Just like with the red dot site, you can do
you can do faster follow up shots, you can aim
the gun more quickly, and you can control it better.
Speaker 6 (25:06):
So again, as.
Speaker 7 (25:08):
With the red Dots site, as with the man with
a higher capacity magazine, this particular takedown lever makes the
gun more dangerous when it's misused, but also makes the
gun more effective for its intended purpose.
Speaker 3 (25:21):
So he goes through I'm not getting through all the
rest of these.
Speaker 2 (25:24):
He goes through all the different parts about how they're
all necessary for the effective, safe, legal use of the
gun of the firearm, and it also makes it more
if you're going to use it for an unlawful purpose,
like you want to murder somebody, it makes it more
effective for that purpose too. So under the California rule,
(25:48):
under the new California law, all of this would make
the firearm illegal, essentially rendering all semi automatic firearms unlawful.
Why do I spend so much time on this Because
this is precisely with the exception of the sights and
(26:08):
the pull down lever and the others, it makes it
all essentially the same as the Colorado bill. They're doing
this exactly the same thing in Colorado. Now, the problem
is the California Appellate Court, the Ninth Circuit, has upheld
the California law. So we might expect, well we might,
I'm not really, I'm not convinced of it yet, but
(26:30):
we might expect the Tenth Circuit in Colorado. Well, first
of all, get through the trial court, and it may
actually have a difficult time getting through the trial court.
But nonetheless, even if it makes it through the trial
court and is shown to be unconstitutional, Senate Bill three,
it'll still make it to the Tenth Circuit, and then
once again it will finally get to the US Supreme Court,
because no matter who wins or loses, whether it's the
(26:52):
state of Colorado or some firearms coalition or a group
of individuals, it'll still get appealed regardless. So it's still
going to up in the US Supreme Court. And these
are guns that are in common use. So the tactic
of the Democrats now is, oh, let's now take all
these subset parts of the gun and make them unlawful
(27:16):
and make them illegal. And therefore we think we can
do a run around the Second Amendment and make all
semi automatics unlawful. Now, in this video, he's using handguns.
A major point that most people gloss over about semi
(27:39):
automatics is shotguns, shotguns, and long guns. I know that
we're talking about long guns. That Democrats think that the
only semi automatic long gun in the history of the
world is an AR fifteen. That's scary looking military style
(28:00):
assault weapon as they call it. You change the basic
structure of an AR fifteen, I can change that to
look like a regular wouldn't be I mean, to an
untrained eye, it might look like a regular rifle or
even maybe a regular shotgun. To an untrained eye, still
(28:25):
semi automatic still does the same thing as the scary
looking military style so called assault weapon of an AR fifteen.
They're just trying to eviscerate every possible way that they can.
Speaker 3 (28:44):
Firearms.
Speaker 2 (28:45):
This isn't about whether it's semi automatic or automatic or
anything else. It's not about whether it's a long gun
or a handgun. It's about eventually outlawing the guns entirely.
And the other worst thing about call over California is
the creation of a gun registry. So when you do
(29:08):
your training, if the Senate bill passes, you'll be registered
in that database. And then when you go to your
local sheriff and he issues you a permit to go, Now,
think about this is not a concealed carry permit. This
is a permit to simply go purchase or possess a
(29:28):
semi automatic. That creates a registry also of exactly how
many and what firearms you own. See how bad colorade
is and you wonder why I'm riled up today.
Speaker 9 (29:44):
Many of the states that have imposed magazine limits are
the same states that have imposed magazine disconnect regulations, meaning
that you can't buy a gun that fires unless a
magazine is inserted. So if a gun can't fire without
a magazine inserted, is it really an excess tree or
is an essential part of that firearm?
Speaker 2 (30:03):
This must be you that since the oh no, it's
not you, this is somebody else licensed gunsmith here. About
about fifty percent or so of semi audos have a
magazine safety, mostly newer models.
Speaker 3 (30:16):
I don't think i'd have h.
Speaker 2 (30:21):
My collection of only one or two guns. I'd say
it's about fifty to fifty with mine with my inventory. Also,
many will fire chambered round without a magazine present, but
most ar pattern rifles, for example, do not have a
magazine safety. The ubiquitous nineteen eleven forty five auto does
(30:42):
not have a magazine safety. Yes, and oh here this
is The states that are passing magazine limits have also
passed magazine disconnect regulations, which make it illegal to sell
a gun in that state if it can fire around
without the magazine inserted. So just pushing around in the
chamber is not going to work in terms.
Speaker 3 (31:00):
Of getting around the law. It's total insanity. This is
pretty good.
Speaker 2 (31:08):
A sharpened knife is safer and better for chopping wood,
but is also more dangerous when it is misused. And
then this shows that you're really paying attention. Twenty nine
to seventy writes with regard to the first hour about
the sticker, Michael, here's an opportunity. The Second Amendment sticker
(31:32):
is just the beginning. Every republic I'm gonna annotate your
text message here. Every Republican in the Colorado House down
to polit bureau should visit the well with their own
stickers on their laptops or on their coats or dresses
(31:53):
or whatever. For example, quote shall make no law respecting
the establishment of religion. There are at least four good
stickers just in the First Amendment. The Fourth Amendment has
some good sticker material making material also, and the thirteenth
Amendment about slavery could cause all sorts of consternation. So
(32:17):
the point is which part of the Constitution would the
Democrats not be offended by? So yes, I would say
to every Republican member, you get a sticker, whether it's
the First, the fourth, the thirteenth, or the fifth Amendment,
take them all and put it on your laptop, put
(32:37):
it on, make a lapel label, do something, and wear
it to the well and see which and make them
argue that it's offensive, make them argue that the thirteenth
Amendment is offensive, make them argue that freedom of religion
is offensive.
Speaker 3 (32:58):
You got two nine to seven zero.
Speaker 2 (33:02):
You're the winner today, because that's exactly the kind of
kind of protest that is simultaneously passive, aggressive, and simultaneously
forcing the Democrats, those damn Marxists at the polit bureau
to I can you tell is this offensing is outlawing slavery?
(33:24):
Is that offensing? Is your freedom of religion? Is that offensive?
So you you don't, You're you're opposed to Islam, you're
opposed to Catholicism.
Speaker 3 (33:36):
Well, what is it about freedom of religion that you
find offensive?
Speaker 2 (33:40):
That's the kind of that's the kind of action that
may seem trivial, that could cause it
Michael, Colorado is one destroyed and worse than California.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
While California has a twenty five cent bag fee, they
at least still have a choice of plastic bags at
the checkout counter.
Speaker 3 (00:15):
Hmmm, Paulus really did a number on us.
Speaker 4 (00:17):
And he's a damn moron.
Speaker 3 (00:22):
As long as we're.
Speaker 2 (00:23):
Talking about guns, A palette judge on the Ninth Circuit,
which is probably the most liberal circuit, is hearing a
gun case, and one of the judges, Lawrence van Dyke,
delivers a descent and in the course of the descent
(00:44):
he and this is all being recorded, and then he
goes through's chambers later and he does another recording. But
what's fascinating about what he does is that he shared
a video of himself. Actually this ascend different firearms. Now
in his chambers he has and I don't know whether
(01:06):
it's a replica or an actual, or maybe it's been disabled,
but he has an AR fifteen on the wall behind
his bench.
Speaker 3 (01:18):
I'd say, I like this guy. I like him.
Speaker 2 (01:24):
You find a defensive sucks to be you, doesn't it.
It's his courtroom. It's an eighteen minute video and he's
talking about essentially the same thing that Colorado's trying to do,
and that is to ban the manufacturer, sale, distribution, possession, whatever,
of semi automatic weapons that have the ability to hold
(01:48):
a magazine with a capacity greater than ten rounds, which
is in common use, common use. And the other thing
is Bill three does, just in generic terms, is it
makes it timely and costly prohibitive to get the training
(02:10):
that this bill requires in order to go to a
sheriff who does not have any longer a shell issue rule.
In other words, if I go to the Douglas County
sheriff and I've taken you know, whatever, you know, stupid
training I have to to do currently to get my
(02:31):
concealed carry permit, think about this. This is to exercise.
This is to exercise not only a god given right
of self defense, but it's to exercise a constitutionally protected
right to keep in bear arms. You have to get
a license to do that, and you forget training to
do that. Well, I think we apply the same damn
(02:53):
rule to speech that if you want to exercise your
right to speech, then I think you ought to take
all these you know, nineteen eighty four type speech classes
to teach you what's offensive and not offensive. I mean,
it's what they're doing. In Great Britain, you can get arrest,
you can get jailed for just being offensive, and there's
(03:14):
no standard by what's offensive. So the other point that
I would make about Senate Bill three is this, they're
disenfranchising poor people. So if you live in one of
these crime ridden apartments that is occupied by Trenda Arragua,
(03:40):
or you live in a neighborhood where crime is rampant
and it's a poor neighborhood, you probably cannot afford the
training that's going to be required so that you could
go to a gun store which may soon be out
of business because they can't sell the guns, and you know,
everybody's just going to go to I'm do you think
(04:01):
I will? Now, I'm not going to say that, because
I'd still like to have a firearms dealer, a gun
store for a sponsor of this program. But I was
going to say absent that I'll just never buy a
gun in Colorado again, just never again. And I hate
(04:22):
to say that because that's going to harm all of
the gun stores in Colorado. But if this bill passes,
and a bill is ultimately upheld, if there's not an
injunction against the enforcement of this bill, or if police
doesn't veto this bill. Why would you ever buy ammo
(04:43):
or a gun or anything in the state. Again, I
certainly wouldn't. I'll just go to New Mexico. In fact,
I'll just go to a.
Speaker 3 (04:52):
Guy that.
Speaker 2 (04:55):
Deals and guns that doesn't live far from men disclose location,
and I'll just tell you what they want.
Speaker 3 (04:59):
I'll just I'll just buy it from him.
Speaker 5 (05:01):
I just get one out of a trunk on Federal I'll.
Speaker 2 (05:03):
Just go exactly, I'll just go to Federal Boulevard. Or
I'll just you know, I don't really want to get
that close to trend to Arragua, but I'll just go
to trend to a Rogua and I'll get it there.
Speaking of trend of Aragua. Before I get back, hang on,
I'll get back to the judge in California in the
Ninth Circuit in just a minute. But remember when we
were told to trend to Arragua, that violent Venezuelan gang
(05:23):
here in Denver and Aurora was just a figment of
our imagination. Remember that Dragging is doing everything he can
today to try to make me laugh because he knows
what'd you call me earlier. Feisty, feisty, am, I feisty
this morning. I'm kind of riled up a little bit today.
Speaker 5 (05:45):
Are I almost old man yelling at clouds? But deserve
so well?
Speaker 3 (05:51):
Thank you, well, thank you for at least admitting deservedly so.
Speaker 4 (05:55):
Well.
Speaker 3 (05:55):
You may remember we were told.
Speaker 2 (05:57):
That TD it was just a figment of our imagination. Well,
guess what happened yesterday the head of the Drug Enforcement Administration,
the DEA, Well, they burst your bubble. They burst that
bubble of that of that imagination, and of course also
of the Democrats of Governor Polis, Mayor Johnston, Mayor Kaufman,
and all the other yahoos that kept telling us that
(06:17):
trend rog with. No, there's nothing to see here, move along,
there's nothing to find, nothing to worry about.
Speaker 3 (06:23):
The DEA confirmed.
Speaker 2 (06:25):
Yesterday that it regards once again Colorado made the top
of the list. Dragon loves list. I love I love
it when I can tell Dragon that we made the
top of the list.
Speaker 3 (06:37):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (06:38):
The head of the DAD e A confirmed Monday that
Colorado is quote ground zero for quote some of the
most violent criminals in America and the quote command center
of TDA.
Speaker 3 (06:56):
But it's just a figment of your imagination.
Speaker 2 (06:59):
Now, in the story that I read, the Denver Police
Department seems to remain in that imaginary bubble, claiming that
they have no evidence that that's true. And I'm thinking,
you know what, They're probably right, because I really doubt
that the Denver Police Department is actually looking for trend
(07:20):
Ragua Hells Belza, not looking for illegal aliens. Why would
they be looking for Venezuelan gang members that probably have
better firearms than they do. And oh, by the way,
when Senate Bill three eventually makes the Governor's desk and
the dumbass governor signs it, God, Jared, I cannot believe.
I cannot believe that that you, as a congressman, and
(07:47):
you and I got to know each other fairly well,
we've had dinner together before. You seem like a reasonable person.
You have turned into a complete socialist. Might You've gotten
off the deep end, totally off the deep end, all
in pursuit of your goal of placating the Marxist wing
of your party and because you want to be president. Well,
(08:11):
how did that worked out for Kamala Harris? How did
that work out for Joe Biden? How's that worked out
for almost any Marxist running for office right now. Oh,
I know Bernie and AOC are drawing big crowds, but
those are paid crowds that are like a bunch of
groupies just following them around. I don't see that you've
got any groupies. You're not a leader. You're not a
(08:32):
leader at all. You're a follower. You are truly just
a follower. Oh, don't get me off. Jared polls for
a moment. Well, anyway, so the judge posts an eighteen minute.
Speaker 3 (08:47):
Video and you can also see it.
Speaker 5 (08:50):
Michael says, go here, do yes.
Speaker 2 (08:52):
And you're gonna hear part of it too, that large
capacity magazines are covered under the Second Amendment. He argues
that the magazines can allow a gun to actually function
better and should be considered functional parts, not an accessory.
And he planned a voice his argument in his descent,
but found it obviously much more effective to simply show you.
(09:17):
And he literally shows you what he's talking about. This
is fascinating to me.
Speaker 3 (09:29):
Here we go.
Speaker 6 (09:30):
Hi, I'm Judge Van Dyk, and welcome to my chambers.
Speaker 7 (09:33):
I'm making his video as part of my opinion in
the Dunca Vonte case. In this case, the state of
California made the argument, which the majority is now accepted, that.
Speaker 6 (09:41):
A magazine holding more than ten rounds is just an.
Speaker 7 (09:43):
Accessory, not an arm protected by the second must right
of the people to keep him their arms. I think
anyone with a basic familiarity with firearms could show you
that this attemptive distinction is simply inconsistent with reality. I
alluded to this during oral argument when I asked California's
counsel about the balance of the tests that are proposed
for what as.
Speaker 6 (10:00):
An arm protected by the Second Amendment. Let's go to
that exchange, now, magazine, and I can ask your.
Speaker 1 (10:06):
Question about that, because so the way you're treating magazines,
it seems like you could use the same sort of
rationale as between a non sim automatic firearm salelever action
or both action or revolver type action and a sem
automatic arm. So I'm trying to figure out if you're
if you're saying, well, what we do is we say,
have people ever.
Speaker 6 (10:26):
Banned particularly dangerous rounds?
Speaker 1 (10:29):
And now we're saying large capacity magazines are particularly dangerous?
Why couldn't that same reasoning be used to ban semi
automatic firearms altogether?
Speaker 3 (10:39):
To say, because I mean, you know, in Colorado.
Speaker 6 (10:41):
Think about it, like during.
Speaker 1 (10:43):
The Revolutionary War, if the United States had had semi
automatic firearms that only held five to ten rounds, it
had been about ten minutes and it would have been
over right as against muskets. So clearly, the semi automatic
mechanism is way, way, way, way way more particularly dangerous
than the difference to delta between a ten round magazine
and a fifteen round magazine. So why does your reasoning
(11:06):
not mean that if you're if this reasoning works, why
does your reasoning not mean that a state could just
ban the semi automatic firearms altogether.
Speaker 6 (11:14):
So if we're just.
Speaker 8 (11:14):
Start talking earner about this initial sort of textual question,
I think, if you're dealing with a semi automatic, that
would fit the definition of an arm.
Speaker 1 (11:24):
No, but that semi automatic could be a revolver, like
it could be I mean, just like just like this,
that high capacity magazine could be a lower capacity magazine, right, because.
Speaker 3 (11:34):
What does it do? It delivers the round to the chamber.
Speaker 2 (11:39):
A revolver, you pull the trigger, the cylinder moves, delivers
the round to the chamber so it can be fired.
What so, and that's essential that's essential to a revolver.
So his point is a magazine does exactly the same thing.
The magazine, say, delivers the realm to the chamber. It's
(12:03):
an essential part of the firearm. It's not an accessory, right.
Speaker 5 (12:06):
You're honor.
Speaker 8 (12:07):
So I think that that would fit the definition of arm,
and then you'd move on to the other aspects of
the brewin analysis. At stage one is a particular weapon
that's being addressed by the law in the tradition of
dangerous and unusual? Is it in common use for self defense?
And we think Heller is clear that that has to
consider the characters.
Speaker 1 (12:25):
I'm not understanding your I guess I think I'm missing
your response to my It seems to me that just
as you could say, are you saying that that yes,
so it would be an arm under you're not. You're
not conceding that it would be an arm under stage one,
So why are you saying it wouldn't.
Speaker 6 (12:39):
Be an arm?
Speaker 1 (12:40):
But the same automatic versus revolver, say, distinction is something
that that we're stuck with. I mean, you would agree
that you can't ban the automatic the automatic mechanism, well.
Speaker 8 (12:52):
An automatic mechanism, I think that you can ban I
think the Supreme Court as.
Speaker 1 (12:55):
Recond the automatic mechanism is a term that sem autos
and fol autos use, an automatic mechanism.
Speaker 6 (13:00):
Sure, you're unner. I'm sorry for the confusion.
Speaker 8 (13:01):
No, I don't think that we could ban all semi
automatic weapons. I think Heller makes that clear. The point
I was just making is with respect to accessories. I
think we have a difference of opinion where my friends
suggest any accessory that is somehow helpful storm.
Speaker 1 (13:16):
So that's that's important because you're so your your argument
turns on whether you can characterize accessory. So you would
say that the revolver versus some automatic is not an accessory,
but that but that a.
Speaker 6 (13:27):
Magazine is a successory.
Speaker 1 (13:28):
So what would you think about like a red dot site,
you know, electro optics, which are which many many firearms
are going to electronic optics nowadays. Could you they're obviously
an accessory because you could have iron sights.
Speaker 6 (13:40):
Could you ban those?
Speaker 8 (13:41):
Well, so your onner, I'm not intimately familiar with that.
Speaker 2 (13:46):
I'm not intimately familiar with a red dot optic. I'm
not familiar with electronic optics. And you're sitting here arguing
the second Amendment case, are you even familiar with guns? Huh?
Speaker 8 (13:58):
And I do want to answer this question and make
sure that I save time for rebuttal, I think that
the question at the outset would be is that if
it's an accessory, is it within the to share a
principle that it's necessary to the realization of the right
to self defense? And you'd have to build a record
and analyze it in that case, counsel.
Speaker 6 (14:18):
Now, from this exchange, it became clear to me than many, including.
Speaker 7 (14:20):
Both California's Council and my colleagues in the majority in
this case, lack of basic familiarity with firearms. I understand
the inherent shortcomings and obvious in administrability of the test
that California was proposing and which the majority in this
case is now adopted. I originally explan to explain all
this in writing in my opinion and why the argument
doesn't make sense, But it occurred to me that in
(14:40):
this instance, showing is much more effective than telling, as
you all saying, go so picture is sometimes worth a
thousand words, and here I hope you will agree that
the videos at least worked that much. And I suppose
at this point in the video is as good a
time as any to apologize for.
Speaker 6 (14:54):
Any shortcomings of the video.
Speaker 7 (14:55):
This is the first video like this that I've ever made,
and in our digital age, I fear that people have
become accustomed to a production quality that I'm sure that
I fall.
Speaker 6 (15:03):
Far short of.
Speaker 7 (15:04):
But I hope and expect that, regardless of any such flaws,
this video will so powerfully serve the purpose for which
I've made it. I also want to emphasize that for
safety purposes, I have rendered an operable all the guns.
Speaker 6 (15:14):
And gun parts that I use to demonstrate today. And finally,
as an appellate body, is obviously.
Speaker 7 (15:19):
Not our role to make factual determination, so I share
this not to supplement the factual record that we are using.
Speaker 6 (15:24):
To decide this case.
Speaker 7 (15:25):
Instead, I share this because a rudimentary understanding of how
guns are made, sold, use, and commonly modified makes obvious
why Californias for post tests and the one my colleagues
are adopting today simply does not work.
Speaker 6 (15:36):
I'm sure I could explain all of this.
Speaker 7 (15:37):
In writing without being accused of improper fact finding, but
it's obviously much more effective to simply show you.
Speaker 6 (15:43):
So let's do that now.
Speaker 2 (15:45):
I love this. I love that this judge is doing
this now. I don't know how widely this will be distributed.
Speaker 3 (15:54):
I don't know how.
Speaker 2 (15:55):
Many people will see it, but the fact that he's said, look,
I'm not supplementing the record. I could put all this
in writing. In fact, I'm sure in his descent he
has it all in writing. But he's going to supplement
his written descent with this video to simply show interested parties,
including the dumb ass person representing the state of California,
(16:19):
about how a magazine is not an accessory. It's an
integral part of the firearm. If you have think about
it in negative terms. If you have a semi automatic firearm,
you've got a nine millimeter glock, but you can't insert
(16:43):
a magazine.
Speaker 3 (16:45):
To you, what good is the block.
Speaker 2 (16:50):
He's trying to point out that it's an integral part
of the firearm, and by making it an accessory, you're
in essence, any these semi automatic firearms that are in
common use, which is the test of whether or not
you have a right to keep them, bear that r'
(17:11):
you'll here's explanation next.
Speaker 6 (17:13):
Correct me if I'm wrong.
Speaker 4 (17:14):
But firearms that use a magazine are inoperable the speed
magazine is removed. You can't just take a round and
shove it up in there with your finger.
Speaker 3 (17:26):
It doesn't work.
Speaker 4 (17:27):
It's meant to be used with that magazine.
Speaker 5 (17:32):
You can put one in the chamber right, it will
still fire. When I wouldn't try it, you would have
to load each round individually into the chamber every time
there there.
Speaker 2 (17:48):
You would have to do that. But you can't. There's
there's physically I'm trying to play it through. I had
I that's pretty dangerous. You can't.
Speaker 3 (18:06):
I don't think there's a way to do it. He
talks about that.
Speaker 7 (18:10):
Okay, to demonstrate, I'm going to start with this sig
P three twenty that's basically in his stock configuration. That is,
this gun is basically in the same configuration it would
come to you from the manufacturer and results you at a retailer.
This is one of the one of the most popular
handguns currently on the market in the United States, and
(18:30):
so I'm going to use this to point out some
of the essential parts of a handgun.
Speaker 6 (18:33):
These same parts would exist on pretty much every handgun, at.
Speaker 7 (18:37):
Least of This is a semi automatic type. So let
me start by pointing out a few of them. This
one comes with a standard twenty one round magazine. Comes
from factories like that. You can buy a similar version
that comes with the with a seventeen round magazine that
fits flush and so it comes to twenty one or
seventeen round magazine. It has a standard full sized group.
(18:59):
It has a factory trigger which has a pull weight
of about seven pounds or so, has front and rear
iron sights that are used to aim the firearm. It
has this little takedown lever which is small and you
may have trouble seeing it, but we're going to talk
about that someone later. And that's what you use to
remove the slide and disassemble the firearm. And the entire
gun is designed around the automatic cycling mechanism. That is,
(19:22):
when you pull the trigger and fire around right when
that app is, it automatically will wrap the slide back,
eject the round to spent cartridge out of the gun.
Speaker 6 (19:32):
It will grab a new round out of the magazine,
put that round.
Speaker 7 (19:35):
Into the chamber, into the barrel, and it'll be ready
to fire another round the.
Speaker 6 (19:40):
Next time you pull the trigger.
Speaker 7 (19:41):
So this is a semi automatic firearm. Now I want
to use this handgun to illustrate first California and the
Majority's argument as applied to this obviously typical and very
common handgun. And then I want to show you that
the same argument would apply to other parts.
Speaker 6 (19:57):
Of the firearm and to this firearm as a whole.
Speaker 7 (20:00):
Now, as a reminder, California's argument, which the majority's adopted
here said, a magazine that holds more than ten rounds
is not an arm protected by the Second Amendment. So
this twenty one round magazine that comes from the factory,
or a seventeen round magazine is.
Speaker 6 (20:14):
Not an arm protected by the Second Amendment.
Speaker 7 (20:16):
Now, California acknowledges that a magazine is necessary to make
the firearm.
Speaker 2 (20:21):
Function, but they see the magazine is necessary to make
the firearm function. To the talkbacks point, Without the magazine,
the firearm doesn't function.
Speaker 6 (20:35):
I argue that.
Speaker 7 (20:36):
Because you can replace the standard magazine with one that
holds fewer rounds ten rounds or less than, these higher
capacity magazines are not an arm and thus wholly unprotected.
Speaker 6 (20:46):
Five.
Speaker 2 (20:46):
Now, think about the brilliance of that argument. So the
state of California wants to argue that if it holds
more than ten rounds. So it's seventeen or twenty one rounds,
then that is an accessory. But if it holds ten
rounds or less, that's not an accessory, and it's an
integral part of the firearm. It's the same magazine, it
(21:10):
just holds a different.
Speaker 3 (21:12):
Number of realms.
Speaker 2 (21:14):
But you can't the firearms inoperable without the five, the ten,
the seventeen, or the twenty one round magazine. And he's
demonstrating this. He's actually showing you how it works.
Speaker 6 (21:28):
Either Second Amend.
Speaker 7 (21:30):
Now, the problem with California's argument is that, as I
pointed out, an oral argument, the exact same argument would
apply to essentially every part on this firearm, which would
mean that essentially nothing on this.
Speaker 6 (21:40):
Firearm would be protected by the Second Amendment.
Speaker 7 (21:42):
Allow me to illustrate that using this firearm not oral argument,
I ask California's council if their argument meant that the
sights on this firearm are.
Speaker 6 (21:51):
Not protected by the Second Amendment.
Speaker 7 (21:52):
And part of the reason I'm making his video is
because it didn't appear that council understood what I was asking.
So take a look again at this handgun. What you
see on here are iron sites. You have a front
and a rear iron sight. And the way that you
fire this handgun, the way you aim it is you
take and you line up these two sites and you
line them up on what you want to shoot at,
and that's how you hit what you're aiming at with
(22:13):
this firearm. These are iron sites, for they're the probably
the most common.
Speaker 6 (22:18):
Sighting system for a handgun.
Speaker 7 (22:20):
And but all you have to do on this particular
handgun to change out the sites is remove two screws
in this slide right here, and the back site comes off.
And when you do that, you can put the two
screws back into a red dot optic and now you
will have a firearm instead of iron sights.
Speaker 6 (22:37):
Will have a red dot optic. Let me illustrate that
by just taking a slide where I've already installed the
red dot optic and here you go.
Speaker 7 (22:44):
See so now you have this backs back iron sight's
been taken off, and here's a red dot optic now.
Speaker 2 (22:50):
And hand So all he's done here is these taken
the rear iron site out, put a red dot optic
on the rear, and put the slide back on. Reassemble
the gun.
Speaker 7 (23:04):
Then that's an experience shooter this red dot optic allows
you to shoot the firearm more quickly, to get on target,
on quickly.
Speaker 6 (23:11):
More quickly, to hit what you're aiming at, be more accurate.
Speaker 7 (23:16):
And so it's obviously much more dangerous if it's being
used for an unlawful or wrong purpose, but if it's
being used for a lawful purpose, and then it makes
the firearm better for that intended purpose. So this firearm
would be better for self defense or competition, recreational shooting or.
Speaker 3 (23:35):
Hunting, and law enforcement.
Speaker 6 (23:39):
My own self.
Speaker 7 (23:41):
Defense hand gun, which this is another P three twenty
that's been configured slightly differently, has a red dot optic
precisely because it makes the firearm better for its intended purpose,
that is self defense.
Speaker 6 (23:53):
It makes it more accurate, more quickly, and shoot more quickly.
Speaker 7 (23:56):
Now, so in that sense, this red dot optic is
just like this magazine. It makes the firearm more dangerous
when it's misused, but it also makes the firearm work
better for its intended purpose when.
Speaker 6 (24:10):
It's used properly.
Speaker 7 (24:12):
Well, you may think that's pretty intuitive about the sighting
system for a firearm, but the same thing is true
about basically every part of this gun.
Speaker 6 (24:19):
Let's take a look at a part which maybe a
little less.
Speaker 7 (24:22):
Intuitive, which is that takedown lever that I talked about earlier.
This little piece here is necessary for the operation of
the firearm.
Speaker 6 (24:30):
It's a tiny little piece that you need to have
for the firearm.
Speaker 7 (24:34):
And so you would think, well, since it's necessary, then
it must be an arm protected by the Second Amendment,
but not under California's logic in this case.
Speaker 6 (24:41):
See, you can replace this.
Speaker 7 (24:43):
Factory takedown lever with a different factory takedown lever.
Speaker 6 (24:46):
This one's called a gas pedal. And when you do that,
you replace it, you put the slide back on. Now
the firearm is a lot more controllable under recoil.
Speaker 7 (24:57):
Just like with the red dot site, you can do
you can do faster follow up shots, you can aim
the gun more quickly, and you can control it better.
Speaker 6 (25:06):
So again, as.
Speaker 7 (25:08):
With the red Dots site, as with the man with
a higher capacity magazine, this particular takedown lever makes the
gun more dangerous when it's misused, but also makes the
gun more effective for its intended purpose.
Speaker 3 (25:21):
So he goes through I'm not getting through all the
rest of these.
Speaker 2 (25:24):
He goes through all the different parts about how they're
all necessary for the effective, safe, legal use of the
gun of the firearm, and it also makes it more
if you're going to use it for an unlawful purpose,
like you want to murder somebody, it makes it more
effective for that purpose too. So under the California rule,
(25:48):
under the new California law, all of this would make
the firearm illegal, essentially rendering all semi automatic firearms unlawful.
Why do I spend so much time on this Because
this is precisely with the exception of the sights and
(26:08):
the pull down lever and the others, it makes it
all essentially the same as the Colorado bill. They're doing
this exactly the same thing in Colorado. Now, the problem
is the California Appellate Court, the Ninth Circuit, has upheld
the California law. So we might expect, well we might,
I'm not really, I'm not convinced of it yet, but
(26:30):
we might expect the Tenth Circuit in Colorado. Well, first
of all, get through the trial court, and it may
actually have a difficult time getting through the trial court.
But nonetheless, even if it makes it through the trial
court and is shown to be unconstitutional, Senate Bill three,
it'll still make it to the Tenth Circuit, and then
once again it will finally get to the US Supreme Court,
because no matter who wins or loses, whether it's the
(26:52):
state of Colorado or some firearms coalition or a group
of individuals, it'll still get appealed regardless. So it's still
going to up in the US Supreme Court. And these
are guns that are in common use. So the tactic
of the Democrats now is, oh, let's now take all
these subset parts of the gun and make them unlawful
(27:16):
and make them illegal. And therefore we think we can
do a run around the Second Amendment and make all
semi automatics unlawful. Now, in this video, he's using handguns.
A major point that most people gloss over about semi
(27:39):
automatics is shotguns, shotguns, and long guns. I know that
we're talking about long guns. That Democrats think that the
only semi automatic long gun in the history of the
world is an AR fifteen. That's scary looking military style
(28:00):
assault weapon as they call it. You change the basic
structure of an AR fifteen, I can change that to
look like a regular wouldn't be I mean, to an
untrained eye, it might look like a regular rifle or
even maybe a regular shotgun. To an untrained eye, still
(28:25):
semi automatic still does the same thing as the scary
looking military style so called assault weapon of an AR fifteen.
They're just trying to eviscerate every possible way that they can.
Speaker 3 (28:44):
Firearms.
Speaker 2 (28:45):
This isn't about whether it's semi automatic or automatic or
anything else. It's not about whether it's a long gun
or a handgun. It's about eventually outlawing the guns entirely.
And the other worst thing about call over California is
the creation of a gun registry. So when you do
(29:08):
your training, if the Senate bill passes, you'll be registered
in that database. And then when you go to your
local sheriff and he issues you a permit to go, Now,
think about this is not a concealed carry permit. This
is a permit to simply go purchase or possess a
(29:28):
semi automatic. That creates a registry also of exactly how
many and what firearms you own. See how bad colorade
is and you wonder why I'm riled up today.
Speaker 9 (29:44):
Many of the states that have imposed magazine limits are
the same states that have imposed magazine disconnect regulations, meaning
that you can't buy a gun that fires unless a
magazine is inserted. So if a gun can't fire without
a magazine inserted, is it really an excess tree or
is an essential part of that firearm?
Speaker 2 (30:03):
This must be you that since the oh no, it's
not you, this is somebody else licensed gunsmith here. About
about fifty percent or so of semi audos have a
magazine safety, mostly newer models.
Speaker 3 (30:16):
I don't think i'd have h.
Speaker 2 (30:21):
My collection of only one or two guns. I'd say
it's about fifty to fifty with mine with my inventory. Also,
many will fire chambered round without a magazine present, but
most ar pattern rifles, for example, do not have a
magazine safety. The ubiquitous nineteen eleven forty five auto does
(30:42):
not have a magazine safety. Yes, and oh here this
is The states that are passing magazine limits have also
passed magazine disconnect regulations, which make it illegal to sell
a gun in that state if it can fire around
without the magazine inserted. So just pushing around in the
chamber is not going to work in terms.
Speaker 3 (31:00):
Of getting around the law. It's total insanity. This is
pretty good.
Speaker 2 (31:08):
A sharpened knife is safer and better for chopping wood,
but is also more dangerous when it is misused. And
then this shows that you're really paying attention. Twenty nine
to seventy writes with regard to the first hour about
the sticker, Michael, here's an opportunity. The Second Amendment sticker
(31:32):
is just the beginning. Every republic I'm gonna annotate your
text message here. Every Republican in the Colorado House down
to polit bureau should visit the well with their own
stickers on their laptops or on their coats or dresses
(31:53):
or whatever. For example, quote shall make no law respecting
the establishment of religion. There are at least four good
stickers just in the First Amendment. The Fourth Amendment has
some good sticker material making material also, and the thirteenth
Amendment about slavery could cause all sorts of consternation. So
(32:17):
the point is which part of the Constitution would the
Democrats not be offended by? So yes, I would say
to every Republican member, you get a sticker, whether it's
the First, the fourth, the thirteenth, or the fifth Amendment,
take them all and put it on your laptop, put
(32:37):
it on, make a lapel label, do something, and wear
it to the well and see which and make them
argue that it's offensive, make them argue that the thirteenth
Amendment is offensive, make them argue that freedom of religion
is offensive.
Speaker 3 (32:58):
You got two nine to seven zero.
Speaker 2 (33:02):
You're the winner today, because that's exactly the kind of
kind of protest that is simultaneously passive, aggressive, and simultaneously
forcing the Democrats, those damn Marxists at the polit bureau
to I can you tell is this offensing is outlawing slavery?
(33:24):
Is that offensing? Is your freedom of religion? Is that offensive?
So you you don't, You're you're opposed to Islam, you're
opposed to Catholicism.
Speaker 3 (33:36):
Well, what is it about freedom of religion that you
find offensive?
Speaker 2 (33:40):
That's the kind of that's the kind of action that
may seem trivial, that could cause it
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!